W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > June 2012

Re: more HTTP status code in SPARQL protocol spec

From: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 08:55:09 -0400
Message-ID: <CAKSO3uk6Z1wcQhqC00k57FBiMEanYFMsMFB-wXhWG0EXh3nSvw@mail.gmail.com>
To: manuelso <manuelso@stanford.edu>
Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Manuel, thanks for your comment.  Please see the response below.

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 12:57 PM, manuelso <manuelso@stanford.edu> wrote:
> Hi,
> Most triple stores in some way or another have to deal with complex queries that cannot be resolved or just partially resolved.

> I just had a look at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-sparql11-http-rdf-update-20120501/#status-codes

> I think that section 5.1 can be extended with the following status codes:

> Partial Content 206
> (partial content is returned by query, but this is not a complete result)

> Request Time out 408
> (no able to generate any results in the given time or to process the query)

> Request Entity Too large 413
> (when the query is too expensive to be processed)

After discussing your comment, the Working Group doesn't think the
suggested codes are appropriate for the situations you describe. For
example, Partial Content 206 is meant for response to a byte range
operation that specifies a single range of bytes to address within the
entity which does not readily translate to the situation in this
protocol where the entity is a sequence of bytes in an RDF document.

However, we have attempted to clarify that *any* HTTP status code can
be used as long as it makes sense to do so per [RFC 2616]. The current
specification says (in 5.1 Status Codes):

"implementations MUST include a status code [RFC2616] appropriate for
the operation indicated and the result from invoking the operation"

We have updated that section (in the editor's draft [1]) with text
from the SPARQL protocol, so it reads:

"Implementations MUST use the response status codes defined in HTTP
[RFC2616] to indicate the success or failure of an operation.
Developers should consult the HTTP specification [RFC2616] for
detailed definitions of each status code."

We would be grateful if you would acknowledge that your comments have
been answered by sending a reply to this mailing list.

Regards, Chimezie Ogbuji, on behalf of the SPARQL WG.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#status-codes
Received on Tuesday, 5 June 2012 12:56:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:52:12 UTC